Jump to content
•Brandon Ice Eyes

Joffrey Was Justified in Beheading Ned Stark.

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, •Brandon Ice Eyes said:

Yes but Im doing this from joffreys POV.

Even from Joffrey's POV, it was a tactless move. He should have known it would lead to a lot of repercussions. Killing all dissidents isn't smart and I would argue not justified either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Apoplexy said:

Even from Joffrey's POV, it was a tactless move. He should have known it would lead to a lot of repercussions. Killing all dissidents isn't smart and I would argue not justified either.

Seems a stretch calling Ned a dissident. Ned tried to organize a coup d'etat. he needed to be dealt with. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

Seems a stretch calling Ned a dissident. Ned tried to organize a coup d'etat. he needed to be dealt with. 

 

True, Ned was much more than a dissident. But even treason (from Joffreys perspective) needs to be dealt with carefully. Sometimes killing the person who organized a coup is much more dangerous than keeping them alive. JOffrey made the wrong choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, •Brandon Ice Eyes said:

Let’s look at it from Joffreys PoV. I myself am a stark fan but even I won’t deny that from Joffrey point of view, Ned had every intention of taking the throne from him of which he thought was his birthright, unaware of his true heritage. This is high treason no matter how you sugarcoat it and I think that his execution was sad, yet justified.

:) 

Joffrey was a victim of the lies told to him by Jaime and Cersei.  Ned was guilty of treason from his angle.  Actually Ned is guilty from the eyes of anyone but those who have very intimate knowledge of the situation.  There is also Ned's public confession to support treason.  The execution was a reasonable sentence for treason.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Apoplexy said:

True, Ned was much more than a dissident. But even treason (from Joffreys perspective) needs to be dealt with carefully. Sometimes killing the person who organized a coup is much more dangerous than keeping them alive. JOffrey made the wrong choice.

Letting him live carried a lot of risk.  We know the Stark heir has no respect for the law.  What if Robb took armed men to the wall and rescued his father.  It won't be easy to send men to the north and arrest them.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone saying that Joffrey caused war is wrong. Renly, Stannis and Balon would still wage war against him. Also, sending Ned to Wall isn't guarantion that Riverland will stay neutral.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Bowen Marsh said:

Letting him live carried a lot of risk.  We know the Stark heir has no respect for the law.  What if Robb took armed men to the wall and rescued his father.  It won't be easy to send men to the north and arrest them.  

That was really unlikely to happen. Ned did not wish to put himself or Robb on the throne. He was opinion that Stannis was the rightful heir. And Sansa was still in Lannister hands, so they had leverage. Killing bed only inflamed the north. The northerners wouldn't take things personally if Ned wasn't killed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Kandrax said:

Everyone saying that Joffrey caused war is wrong. Renly, Stannis and Balon would still wage war against him. Also, sending Ned to Wall isn't guarantion that Riverland will stay neutral.

But killing Ned ensured that the riverlands and the north wouldn't stay neutral. It made them certain enemies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joff keeping Ned a prisoner in King's Landing may have been his best move. Like Bloodraven kept Daemon II alive and a prisoner in King's Landing so Bittersteel couldn't crown his younger brother. This way Joffrey could have had Ned send letters to Robb and all the other Northern lords ordering them to stand down. Joff might have to technically pardon Ned though so he'd still be the Lord of Winterfell and Warden of the North in name and have the authority to order Robb and his Northern army to go home. Then without the North the Riverlands would be outnumbered and forced to kneel. Anytime Ned thought of disobeying Joff he could threaten Sansa. With Arya missing he could tell Ned she's being held in a secret location to guarantee no one tries any foolish rescue missions. I believe this is how Tywin would have played it if he made it to KL before Ned was executed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, EloImFizzy said:

Sure he was justified to do it, but firstly he promised that he would let Ned join the Nights Watch, and secondly it threw the whole realm into a pointless war, which killed thousands and thousands of people. Say what you want about Aerys, but the man was tortured, and mentally ill. Joffrey was just a cunt. 

As Bronn said "There's no cure for bein a cunt."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, EloImFizzy said:

Sure he was justified to do it, but firstly he promised that he would let Ned join the Nights Watch,

Varys promised Ned that. 

5 hours ago, EloImFizzy said:

 

and secondly it threw the whole realm into a pointless war, which killed thousands and thousands of people.

Not actually true. Renly declared himself King, Stannis started preparing for war and the battles of the Green Fork, Whispering Wood and the Camps all took place before the various factions had heard of his death. 

If Ned was still alive he'd of been exchanged for Jaime but the war would have carried on.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, The Sunland Lord said:

Joffrey broke his word, that he would be merciful. That's the problem. After Ned was obviously defeated, sending him to the Wall could've bought Joff even some sympathy. After Ned's plot failed and his men killed, that could've been counted as the ruthless part of king Joffrey, if he was wise. 

Letting Ned to join the Night's Watch would've shown the merciful part of Joff. After all, sending a nobleman to the Wall is a very practical solution, and is done very often. 

The trick in ruling is to show mercy after being ruthless. 

Being merciful to somebody who committed treason against you is dumb.  A monarch can and should forgive some acts of transgression.  But not for treason.  

It was a harsh punishment but fitting for the crime of treason.  Inconsistency on the part of the judge is much, much worse.  Robb Stark's brand of justice was inconsistent and thus, it was not justice.  I can level the same criticism at Jon Snow and his handling of his fellow brothers, Janos and Mance.  It is inconsistency that is the greater problem when it comes to the question of justice.  

7 hours ago, •Brandon Ice Eyes said:

And Joffrey pardoned dozens of men sworn to stannis but not stannis himself. Stannis and Ned committed high treason and could not be forgiven but the men under them could.

Right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joffrey was still a 12 year old, tall for his age but out of control snot, not yet the monster but still, the inner circle of KL court knew what he was (The Pregnant Cat incident). Sir Illyn Payne, Sir Janos Slynt ignored Queen Regent Cersei, Varys etc as they protested and tried to stop the beheading. I always found it odd that Sir Illyn, who was the one to swing the Sword, was not reprimanded at all for this. Clearly, he knew that Cersei and Varys were trying to stop the execution and that Joff was still a child but did it anyway, Ser Janos as well. Ser Janos was removed later on, mainly because Tyrion wanted to get Harrenhall back from him etc. The killing of the baby in the brothel was ordered by Cersei and tyrion knew that too, so that was not the reason either, they just wanted that taken back from him as they found it too much for such a lowly born man as Sir Janos.

Edited by A Ghost of Someone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, A Ghost of Someone said:

Joffrey was still a 12 year old, tall for his age but out of control snot, not yet the monster but still, the inner circle of KL court knew what he was (The Pregnant Cat incident). Sir Illyn Payne, Sir Janos Slynt ignored Queen Regent Cersei, Varys etc as they protested and tried to stop the beheading. I always found it odd that Sir Illyn, who was the one to swing the Sword, was not reprimanded at all for this. Clearly, he knew that Cersei and Varys were trying to stop the execution and that Joff was still a child but did it anyway, Ser Janos as well. Ser Janos was removed later on, mainly because Tyrion wanted to get Harrenhall back from him etc. The killing of the baby in the brothel was ordered by Cersei and tyrion knew that too, so that was not the reason either, they just wanted that taken back from him as they found it too much for such a lowly born man as Sir Janos.

Varys of all people should not be surprised at this.  It is standard for sers to follow the order of their king.  The prisoner just confessed to treason.  The king ordered his execution.  What were these men supposed to do?  Remember, power resides where men believe it resides.  Coming from Varys himself.  I don't buy into the philosophy myself but the two sers do.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bullrout said:

Varys of all people should not be surprised at this.  It is standard for sers to follow the order of their king.  The prisoner just confessed to treason.  The king ordered his execution.  What were these men supposed to do?  Remember, power resides where men believe it resides.  Coming from Varys himself.  I don't buy into the philosophy myself but the two sers do.  

I think I understand where you are coming from but I did not mention what all of you mentioned before, there was a deal made, Joffrey knew of it etc. Also, as Tyrion pointed out, there idiots listened to a 12 year old child above that of his own Queen Mother, the Regent Defacto etc. 

Now, add to this, in the Novels, I believe that Joffrey ordered Ned beheaded anyway, on the strong advise and encouragement of Littlefinger. The reasons are there. All of the Small council protested and tried to stop this but LF did not, he just stood there. Also, if Ned want to the Night's Watch, there is nothing to prevent him from getting a word to Cat or anyone he knew that LF betrayed him in any capacity. Especially he would have told Cat this as she was the one who insisted that Ned trust him. Either way, in any way, I think LF was doing all that he could to isolate Sansa by this time and any word of his betrayal getting back to her would have damaged his chances at whatever he is currently playing out around her, with her. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bullrout said:

Being merciful to somebody who committed treason against you is dumb.  A monarch can and should forgive some acts of transgression.  But not for treason.  

So Tywin, Bloodraven (not kings but very influental Hands, and VERY harsh men) were stupid to let people live after they rebelled and confessed. 

If one rebels and confesses and submits, I don't think it's that dumb to send him to the Wall, or reducing his power and lands.

It's still a punishment, not a pardon.

Edited by The Sunland Lord

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, The Sunland Lord said:

So Tywin, Bloodraven (not kings but very influental Hands, and VERY harsh men) were stupid to let people live after they rebelled and confessed. 

If one rebels and confesses and submits, I don't think it's that dumb to send him to the Wall, or reducing his power and lands.

It's still a punishment, not a pardon.

Different people different rules, but I’d still pardon his subordinates but not Ned. Up to you how you would deal with him but the wall is not sufficient punishment for high treason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Apoplexy said:

riverlands

Riverland  could still go to war, if after Hoster's death Edmure decided to earn some glory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Kandrax said:

Riverland  could still go to war, if after Hoster's death Edmure decided to earn some glory.

True. Even the Brackens and Blackwoods(mortal enemies), were in agreement in wanting to continue warring with the iron-throne. Ned’s release to the wall would likely pacify the North(Robb’s main reason for fighting after all was to avenge Ned), but there aren’t really guarantees that Edmure won’t align  himself with either Stannis or Renly or whoever for the appeal of glory, and revenge on house Lannister for butchering and raping his people(to which he genuinely cares for).

Edited by Varysblackfyre321

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joffrey would have the right and justification to execute Ned, except... 

Joffrey was a minor who should not be making decisions at all, but have a Regent making them for him and as it seems that people have forgotten that was supposed to be Ned, per Robert's will. Which was made under false assumptions, but Cersei took over anyway and Joffrey disregarded the deal she had made. 

Legality had long since gone out of the window. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×